Browser Wars

Tags

browser wars, Flipped Lecture, netmed

We’ve seen it countless times before and will see it in the future, like VHS vs Beta max, Blu-Ray disc vs HD dvd whenever a new technology is developed there is usually a battle for who has control over the distribution of it. This too was the case for the Internet. Browser Wars, which is part of “Download: The True Story of The Internet” looks at the battle for supremacy over Internet browsers.

The internet was described by one as something “you don’t know you need until you have it” as someone old enough to (just) remember a world before the World Wide Web, it’s amazing how true this is. If you’ve ever had an issue with power or your phone network for a day, you’ll realize just how web dependent we’ve become, the internet is increasingly becoming the basis of all our shopping, entertainment, social and research needs, so much so that through mobile technology we’ve created a way to constantly have access to a screen with the internet. However 10 years ago there certainly wasn’t a he ground swell of people who thought catching up over the phone or in person was to inefficient, or who weren’t happy to go to a local shopping center and whilst people may have been less then thrilled with searching through libraries for information, even the internet hasn’t made homework anything less than a burden for most students.

It’s striking just how little attention we pay to the humble browser. Even now with the plethora of options I tend to use what ever is in the dock without thinking much about it. However the browser is what transformed the World Wide Web from a highly specialized bunch of coding that was difficult for a regular person to use, to the mass medium we experience it as today.

It’s interesting to hear that at one point in time the Internet was synonymous with Netscape, much as search engines are now synonymous with Google. The way these things are able to change is a good reminder of the possibility and power of innovation and change.

This is further highlighted by the paradigm shift from Apple to Microsoft, showing that despite their monopoly and power innovation is always possible. As of February 2012 Apple is now valued at 462 billion dollars, nearly more than double Microsoft’s 257 billion dollars.

What once started out as a pipe-dream revolutionized the way we are able to use the Internet. Without it, free unrestricted Internet usage for everyday people would have been highly unlikely. That has now paved the way for multiple other platforms to re-create the World Wide Web, making it easier to use in Google’s case and more mobile in Apple’s case. Interestingly, Firefox, a descendant of Netscape, remains the second most popular Internet browser today.

It’s also worth keeping in mind the type of browser your audience use as a creative type on the Internet. Things like blogs and Facebook fan pages often included a breakdown of what browser was used to access your site. This is important for a number of reasons. Firstly are they accessing it from a mobile device or computer? This will greatly impact the way they are able to interact with your content. Secondly, whilst inaccurate and superficial there is certainly a feeling amongst some that browser preferences reflect personality. Sites like this or this offer personality profiles for different browser users and could be worth factoring in to your next assessment of your audience.

Advertisements

6 Kevin Bacons of network theory

Tags

6 degrees, Flipped Lecture, kevin bacon

6 Degrees of Separation is a documentary, which sets out to investigate the age-old myth that through a chain of friends any person can be connected to any other person in the world in 6 steps.

The documentary is loosely based on scientists investigating the theory, who explain that if every body has access to 100 friends, and each of those people have access to 100 friends you can see how each step along the way the total number of people in someone’s network is actually quiet broad. In this way networks collapse the seemingly unimaginable 7 billion people in the world, in on each other and making the connections between each of them closer then you’d have thought.

Crazy isn’t it, by this logic we’d all know someone, who knows someone, who’s friends with, a guy who was on a contiki tour with, the personal trainer of, the best friend of, someone who is friends with Angelina Jollie… So maybe my dream of meeting and marrying her one-day is closer than I’ve ever known.

Obviously there are some kinks in the system meaning that the 6 degrees rule won’t work for everyone. Largely because the theory requires each persons network to be varied and diverse, the more overlap in a network (for example a remote tribal town) the bigger the world is, because each person has the same kind of network.

With that said the Internet is a tool that is making it easier to diversify your personal network. People are no longer bound by geography and can create networks on interest. Things like forums and online communities allow us to extend our networks and create links where there is very little overlap between our network and that of our new friend.

In 2008 a study of Microsoft’s instant messenger found that there was 6.6 degrees of separation between people. However this study took a rather broad interpretation of who is in someone’s network, for the purpose of the study two people were considered to be acquaintances if they had each sent one another a single message. The case also found whilst the average was 6.6 degrees some people were separated by as many as 29. The study also found people were more likely to communicate with someone of a similar age, who spoke the same language and was in a similar location.

Since then the advent of social media has not only realized the theory of 6 Degrees of Separation, but it has actually enhanced it to around 4.7. Rob Petersen looked at 5 different studies into social medias impact on networks theory. A study of Facebook friends found the average number of acquaintances separating any two people on Facebook was 4.74.

Whilst a Twitter study came up with the following results

The average on twitter is similar to that of Facebook with 4.67 being the average distance between any two people. What is interesting is that nearly 44% of people are separated by 4 steps or less.

The increase in the power of networks on social media reinforces a number of things. One the greater the ease of communication the more effective networks are. In the documentary this is demonstrated by the analogy of two people at opposite ends of a football field needing to share a message. With no means to facilitate the message, the only way to do so would be a Chinese whispers type passing on of the message from one person to the next thousands of times. However if you strategically placed walkie-talkies around the ground the message could be passed on in just a few steps.

The second thing it reinforces is that the more we have in common the more closer we are going to be linked in a network. Whilst Social Media is a broad and widely used tool, it still has a lot of things in common. It requires access to the technology and is still skewed to a younger audience. For example nearly 50% of Australia’s Facebook users are still under 35.

The thing is, for network theory to be of use to marketers and creative content producers; it really doesn’t need to apply to everyone anyway. The fact is, what ever it is you are marketing or creating online, it has a target audience in mind. That target audience is more than likely going to share a lot in common with you, and the network theory of 6 (less than 5) Degrees of Separation means that you have access to them, your audience is out there. What are you waiting for?

Flipped Lecture: John Cleese – Creativity

Tags

Creativity, Flipped Lecture, John Cleese

As someone who often has many projects on the go, and many of them with a comedy focus, I am always intrigued by the idea of creativity. I have spent countless hours starring at blank screens and blank pieces of paper hoping for an idea to hit me. I’ve thrown notebook after notebook away thinking perhaps that was the problem.

I have watched and read a variety of different tips, lectures and guides to being creative but the one I always go back to is the one given by John Cleese.

I think the most significant thing identified in the lecture is the distinction between the two modes of thinking. Open Mode and Closed Mode. The Closed mode, Cleese identifies as the standard way of operating in the western world. It is results focused, driven by efficiency, the problem with this for creativity is it doesn’t give ideas any room to breath and come to life. If you are working under pressure with a strict result in mind you’re unlikely to produce something creative. Creativity relies on the being unique and original, where as results and efficiency relies on doing now without time to create something out of the ordinary.

Alternatively, the Open Mode is a more playful and free mode of thinking, it is about being comfortable with a lack of answers, rather than being results driven, the open mind preferences ideas for ideas sake and allows our imaginations to run wild. This in turn allows us the space to create.

The open and closed modes of thinking link well are reminiscent of some of the writings of French philosopher Jean Baudrillard. Baudrillard was a post-modern philosopher who advocated pataphysics. Most importantly in regards to creativity Baudrillard juxtaposed the ideas of production and seduction. Production for Baudrillard seems to be what Cleese is referring to as the ‘closed mode’ it is a world based on producing things, in this school of ideas everything is a means to an end it is results based. Baudrillard’s preference was for seduction, which was a playful reconstruction of reality in the way in which one felt one would get the most enjoyment.

It seems that far from being motivating pressure and stress are roadblock to creativity. If one wants to truly get creativity, then one must be willing to give that creativity time, to be willing to make mistakes, and in fact a step further, one must not be judging the activity as a means to an end. Nothing when being created should be treated as a mistake, the exercise of exploring the ideas is what is important as a self-sustaining exercise. If this is done enough then creativity should in theory follow.